Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Elizabeth Holmes loses bid to stay out of prison

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 315 posts

Re: Elizabeth Holmes loses bid to stay out of prison

#251

Post by pas »

rwmj wrote: post #110
polotics wrote: post #67

The news IMHO is how come she's not yet behind bars?

It's strange isn't it! Does it happen in other countries that you can negotiate when your prison sentence starts? Here in the UK, the judge passes sentence and literally "sends you down" to the cells to start it. (The holding cells in larger courts are physically below the dock where the prisoner is sentenced https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/send-dow... ) Also this rule only seems to apply to rich…

in Hungary recently a famous musician got caught stealing electricity (for his apartments that were rented by others), got sentenced, but managed to postpone going to jail because he got sick.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes loses bid to stay out of prison

#252

Post by p_j_w »

xtracto wrote: post #235
p_j_w wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>rehabilitation effect of prison There is no such effect in the USA. Prisons are 100% not designed to rehabilitate anyone here.

What do you think of Danny Trejo's rehabilitation [1]? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danny_Trejo#Life_of_crime_and_...

One person rehabbing doesn't invalidate the mountains of evidence the other way.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes loses bid to stay out of prison

#253

Post by sebzim4500 »

00F_ wrote: post #185
sebzim4500 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

11 years is quite a long time and seems suitable for scamming some idiots out of their money. IMO the reason it seems low is that people get such unreasonably long sentences for doing far less.

[flagged]

I'm not saying all rich people are idiots, just the ones that invested in Theranos.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes loses bid to stay out of prison

#254

Post by gamblor956 »

Alupis wrote: post #238
gamblor956 wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The CIA does not deal with fugitives....but the FBI does. They have a task force devoted to tracking down fugitives. The FBI generally works through Interpol to bring back international fugitives (for example, Tamara Dadyan) but will also "blackbag" fugitives if necessary. It's just not necessary to do that very often.

The list of countries that do not extradite or cooperate with international law enforcement is surprisingly large... it's not just tropical islands. There's also plenty of countries that would enjoy harboring a wanted US person.

The list of countries that don't extradite to the U.S. and the list of countries a wealthy person would want to live in don't have much overlap, unless you think Syria and Somalia are wonderful places to live. (There are a number of countries, like Indonesia and Vatican City that don't have extradition treaties with the U.S. but which will extradite to the U.S. through Interpol.)

Re: Elizabeth Holmes loses bid to stay out of prison

#255

Post by wpietri »

HelloMcFly wrote: post #160
wpietri wrote: post #69

One of the questions I have about any fraudster is where they fall on the goof/sociopath spectrum. It's surprisingly easy to start a Ponzi scheme by accident, after all. You just offer investors good returns (legal), be too optimistic about how it will go (legal), and then give them the promised returns anyhow by using other investor money (very illegal). I suspect a number of companies even get away with it, as they…

I don't like Holmes and am pleased she's getting some comeuppance, but I can play Devil's Advocate in this one space: maybe she always wanted kids, focused on her career (lol), then this all happened, XYZ. Holmes is 39 years old. If she really, truly wanted biological children then now was the time to make sure it happened. She's a villain, but she's also a complex human being that probably has multiple priorities, g…

I never said she didn't want children. She may well have. So what?

She wanted investors' money, too. Having wants does not justify harm to others.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes loses bid to stay out of prison

#256

Post by wpietri »

robocat wrote: post #146
wpietri wrote: post #69

One of the questions I have about any fraudster is where they fall on the goof/sociopath spectrum. It's surprisingly easy to start a Ponzi scheme by accident, after all. You just offer investors good returns (legal), be too optimistic about how it will go (legal), and then give them the promised returns anyhow by using other investor money (very illegal). I suspect a number of companies even get away with it, as they…

> then give them the promised returns anyhow by using other investor money (very illegal) Actually, that is normal accepted business in many cases, and not illegal except in specific circumstances. Classic example is commercial real estate bonds, where they roll over (the new bonds pay the old bond holders). Or an IPO looks like a Ponzi, but usually isn't.

An IPO doesn't involve the company paying stockholders. It involves investors paying the company. Then previous stockholders sell their shares to future ones.

And bondholders understand up front that they are getting cash back on a particular date; that's the whole deal with a bond. Stockholders, though, expect profits to come from a functioning enterprise that generates value, not newer stockholders.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes loses bid to stay out of prison

#257

Post by 00F_ »

ceejayoz wrote: post #240
00F_ wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

so where is your proposal to limit the passengers of a self driving car, all of the countless brands who are advertising level 2 systems? where is your proposal for compromise? there are none because nobody who likes pouring cold water on tesla is coming from a place of intellectual honesty. so self driving cars could only exist for a billionaires profit? how about for the countless lives that will be saved by this t…

> so where is your proposal to limit the passengers of a self driving car That limit is in place for student drivers to limit distractions; it's a specific mitigation to a problem specific to them. FSD needs its own. > where is your proposal for compromise? I'd like to see safety data reporting requirements that come from regulators, not Tesla, whose self-reported cherry-picked data points I find quite suspect. (Exam…

these compromises are productive and show that you do come from a place of intellectual honesty.

if the federal government had been tasked with overseeing the early versions of fsd, it would have been swiftly shut down because of the nature of the federal government, not to mention the politics. but thanks to the private sector we now have modern fsd which is bar none the most advanced and capable self-driving solution in the world. now that self driving has gotten this far, its probably much less likely to be aborted if subjected to government intervention and oversight. in light of the huge benefits that self-driving cars stand to create, measured in human lives, compromise is the only rational proposal. shutting down fsd like mouth-breathing internet commenters talk about would be objectively wrong given the state of its competitors and the nature of the problem.

edit: your bio says 'fuck elon musk.' making a two dimensional character out of elon musk isnt a good way to understand him or his projects. when the time comes and elon musk uses his influence and money to do something really bad, it might be boy crys wolf thanks to your camp.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes loses bid to stay out of prison

#258

Post by 00F_ »

ok_dad wrote: post #210
00F_ wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

so when they introduced drive by wire, and just put it out there on the roads without telling anyone, that was reckless? or any of the countless other designs that have led us to the modern cars we have now? how about all the severe recalls, not over the air recalls that tesla gets press for but real safety issues? GM and the others have tons and tons of real physical safety recalls, way more than tesla, and thats no…

Well, drive by wire wasn't just put out there, it was tested on military jets for decades and the tech eventually got to cars. There are also testing rigs and failsafes for such designs, however Tesla is just putting a black-box AI on the roads in charge of massive vehicles. I'm not going to engage with someone like you any longer, though, as you're being really fucking rude.

[flagged]

Re: Elizabeth Holmes loses bid to stay out of prison

#259

Post by giantrobot »

LanceJones wrote: post #103
ok_dad wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm an FSD Beta user... 1000s of other Beta testers Ah, so the hundreds of thousands or millions who bought FSD years ago should be happy that a few thousand of you get to test out a system with your own lives. Great. Edit: Don't bother responding if you're a Tesla or Elon fanboy/fangirl. I'm not interested in being insulted any longer by you folks.

There are 400,000+ Beta users currently (US and Canada). You are being fooled by the headlines. The people in the EU have a legitimate beef (not being able to use the functionality). "test a system with our own lives" is silly hyperbole and you know it.

Yeah sometimes it's other peoples' lives.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes loses bid to stay out of prison

#260

Post by ashwagary »

dragonwriter wrote: post #43
nickpinkston wrote: post #3

If you steal more than $5K three times in California, you will get 25 years in prison [1], and while I think that's disgusting and detestable, I don't want any elites getting special treatment either, so as to force change in those sentencing guidelines. [1] https://www.kannlawoffice.com/grand-theft.html

The federal sentencing guidelines have nothing to do with California state criminal law. Of course, if an act is both a federal and state crime, you can be prosecuted for each. In fact, if an act is a crime in multiple states (which is possible), you can be charged and punished separately by each state as well as the federal government if it is also a federal crime. This rarely happens even where theoretically possib…

>if an act is a crime in multiple states (which is possible), you can be charged and punished separately by each state

For the California three strikes law, am I correct in guessing all three strikes have to be in the state of California, or can 1-2 of the earlier strikes be in another state?

If the former is true, is the optimal choice after 2 strikes to leave California permanently (other than ceasing criminal activity of course)?

Post reply on HN